The Internet Is Filled With Idiots
A little bird recently sent me this post and requested that I publish it. So I am.
————
I may be alone in this opinion, but I think reviewing anime and manga in an
annual publication is probably pointless. As the only academic journal
specifically for manga/anime studies, I buy Mechademia for the
academic work and only read reviews of academic texts. By the time the
journal comes out I’ll almost always have seen the anime or read a
review from one of the many non-academic magazines or websites. My
impression from the shelves of my local bookshop is also that a lot of
anime/manga titles being published are still in the form of beginners
guides, which are also not particularly useful to
Mechademia’s primary audience (or the audience I assume it has, I may
be completely wrong!).
Thanks, Sophie. No, you’re not wrong about Mechademia; many of its
readers are scholars, serious fans, and academics.
But let me try to explain something further about our reviews,
especially of manga and anime. There are, in general, three kinds of
reviews, Two we do not want; one we do. The two we do not want are
purchasing advice and comments/opinions about quality.
Purchasing advice refers to a review that tells the reader whether or
not they should buy or read the manga or anime being reviewed. The
**vast** majority of “reviews” on the internet are of this kind. Often
they are written in semi-literate Internetese (“Naruto is just SOOOO
kkkoooollll! AWWWsome!”) and record the writer’s enthusiastic joy in
the story or his (much of the time, it’s a he) detestation of
something. “I mean, what is so cool about Misa? She’s an airhead.
Light is much better off without her,” says this person about Misa
Amano from “Death Note” (I’m paraphrasing a real comment, BTW). You
can find lots and lots of these reviews on amazon.com, often signed
with names like “Otakuman”. As records of individual opinion, these
reviews are priceless; as serious reviews, they’re useless. We don’t
publish that kind of stuff.
The second kind of review we don’t publish centers on the writer’s
opinions about “quality.” These folks also inhabit the Internet is
vast numbers; they’re the people who solemnly tell you that the video
transfer on “Cutey Honey” is really very good. They go on knowingly
(if uninsightfully) about pixellation and the lack of audio fidelity
in the dubbing. Or they will praise the seiyuu — these people pride
themselves on knowing some Japanese words — for her superb rendition
of Masako from “Eri the Ninja Girl” (which I made up for the
occasion). Then they will go into rants about the hyperellipticism of
“Eri the Ninja Girl,” hoping to impress us all by his ability to spell
“hyperellipticism” (which I also made up for the occasion). We don’t
publish that kind of stuff either.
That takes care of the vast majority of reviews that actually exist
out there on the web and in the few print sources that publish
reviews. Most of them are careless, tossed-off-in-an-hour records of
half-baked opinion. Enthusiastic, misspelled, and ultimately useless.
The reviews we do publish are analytical essays about the manga or
anime in question. Analytical means that the reviewer has to explain
how the narrative is constructed and why, and explain what it means
and tells us. The ideal reaction to such a review is for the reader to
say “Oh, I see!” Our model is the kind of review that might be
published in the New York Times or the New Yorker — literate,
thought-through, with a theoretical framework that makes sense. It
will be worth reading five years from now.
A number of people on this listserve have written reviews for
Mechademia, and trust me, they’re very skilled. When one of these
folks reviews “Death Note”, there will be a lot to take home from that
review. In this case, the reviewer will be Susan Napier, who has
agreed to review “Death Note” for us. You are not going to hear
silliness about “What is so cool about Misa?” from *her*.
Another way of putting it is to say that Mechademia reviews of manga
and anime are short, focussed essays on one work that deal with its
internal aesthetic dynamics. So please do read some of our manga and
anime reviews and see what you think for yourself!
————
lol
Your input in that post was so … concise.
Everyone is intelligent but then, I guess according to Gramsci, there is “the organic intellectual” – the blogosphere intelligentsia.
Sounds good, where do we get this?
Mechademia can be purchased off Amazon
Sounds good, but I’m afraid it’s going to suffer the same thing that I imagine made Newtype go under – the fact that I could buy a damn manga volume for the same price.
Mechademia is an annual academic journal. Don’t compare it to Newtype.
needs more nuts.
Picking up on digitalboy, I always thought Mechademia must be profitable, or at least must make more money than your average academic journal. I mean, I salivate over Spenser Studies: A Renaissance Poetry Annual, but there isn’t a substantial market of interested amateur fans of Edmund Spenser out there.
At least, not to my knowledge.
A purely explanatory essay without value judgments is not a review at all in my books, it needs critique.
Ah, Susan Napier…I hope she’s amended her ways in more recent years. Her first widely published book on anime, written after a whopping *five years* of anime interest, gave Ah My Goddess and Gunsmith Cats as examples of “shoujo” while the then still-airing in the US dubbed (ick) Sailor Moon was pretty much beneath her notice as it was something her kid watched and is only mentioned briefly elsewhere as an example of children’s anime along with Pokemon. Other parts of her book showed her strengths from her background in Japanese culture studies and such, but with stuff like that it was hit or miss. I’ve cringed ever since when she’s been interviewed in media as an expert on the anime subject. >__>
***
Meanwhile, while I’m here, curse you for posting a while back about Ryofuko-chan! (which somehow had escaped my radar) Now I’m stuck…has there been a subbed 3&4? And I have to also collect “I, Otaku” now I know Ryofuko-chan originated as the “show within the manga” a la Kujian with Genshiken. The anime is directed by veteran animator Yuji Moriyama no less. He sure seems to like doing weird loli anime in his later career (Koutetsu no Densetsu, Jungle De Ikou, etc…although I guess his old Pop Chaser and Project A-ko dip into that territory too some, more or less), while still keeping his reputation as a kick ass animator, especially for openings.
/way, way OT spam, sorry…
So wait, the show-within-a-show has been made into an anime and the actual manga hasn’t? LOL
I don’t know much about Napier, so I can’t say anything. That sounds pretty bad, though.
Granted, I’m on that mailing list, actually. :P
And I have the two volumes of Mechademia released already. At times, it ends up being too academic, and in a way heavily biased. :3
Here at Pretentious Anime Magazine Monthly we pride ourselves on our anime reviews that span five pages. If it’s any shorter, it’s not intelligent enough. And that’s only our shortest review this issue.
Anime is serious business, guys. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
Me not knowing about Mechademia until now proves I will know more about modern military innovations than stuff about anime…
The first volume of Mech was underwhelming. The second volume, boasting many more contribs from…you know…actual Japanese people was a vast improvement. The best one though for my money is Robot Ghosts and Wired Dreams. Anything with Takayuki Tatsumi is solid gold.
Yeah, it’s getting out of hand… I guess it had to happen at some point. I assume there’s subtle references to the original “host” manga here and there, but I haven’t gone back and looked yet. Actually I picked up vol. 1 of it since I posted here, and it’s not bad, though Ryofuko doesn’t show up until later volumes (at this point it’s just the “Papiko” character’s franchise and some shoujo thing I forget the name to). Gomanga.com’s got the first chapter of the manga previewed here: http://gomanga.com/webmanga/index.php?series=iotaku&page=1
It isn’t NHK or Genshiken (at least not at this point…it has been running for a while now), but it’s got some good lines here and there, and some good jokes at the expense of the “three dimensionals”…